• Yggstyle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    I touched on this above but did a very quick modification on mobile and only adjusted black levels. Not warmth, hue, saturation etc. The man is, unquestionably, of the “fake tan / orange” variety - and the woman, while more “natural,” is effectively leather. I left our head dried apricot in charge out of the picture because he is easily the worst one in the image. The painting is catching some bad light - but it’s still a bit too washed out regardless.

    Original:

    Black levels eyeballed:

    • SSTF@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Look at the guy in the far right of the original photo vs the photo I put up. He has a fairly normal skintone in the photo I put in, and is positively oranged up in the OP photo. I think he is a good barometer of the change. This isn’t to say RFK is a baseline normal looking person, but two things can be true- RFK looks weird and the colors were heightened, with one result being exaggerating the tone that was already there for him.

      • Yggstyle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        Sure. There are absolutely people in that photo who have a normal skin tone. If the saturation were being brutally jacked up to make RFK look orange then they too would be off color completely (most likely beet red.) The point I was getting at is this doesn’t take much modification (even to fairly benign levels like my example shows) to land him firmly in the topic’s question.

        Yes - the observation is being made because it’s funny; but if we’re being honest - the pictures don’t really need all that much assistance to make OPs point, though.